Why aren’t they making an MBT with Crewless Turret and bustle Autoloader? Thing is already outdated before its going to enter Service
It’s not outdated at all lmao it’s actually pretty standard with current NATO tanks.
Autoloader have improved a insane amount but the reliability of having the loader and a extra crew member for any maintenance or repairs is insanely valuable
1 Like
To be fair, the M1E3 program has gone with a unmanned turret design, the Puma also makes use of an unmanned turret design.
It seems pretty clear that that’s where future projects are headed.
What is a ifv. Has totally different needs from a mbt lmao they aren’t comparable.
It has but that’s a tank made for the 2030s and still might change development alot your comparing tanks made to be produced and enter service this year ish to a tank 10-15 maybe even 20 years away
The idea of a 3 man crew and unmanned turret is a preference for certain militaries.
The British Army does not like the idea of a 2 man turret (3 man crew) as for a vehicle the size of Challenger 3 maintenance and logistics become unreasonably difficult.
If you are having 4 man crew anyway, the need for an autoloader is diminished significantly.
As far as I’m aware the inclusion of an autoloader was considered but was not chosen, we know an autoloader can be fitted as the Challenger 2 130mm demonstrator (made by Rheinmetall) used one in a very similar turret.
Autoloaders are not some kind of magic technology that is required for modern tanks to be capable.
4 Likes
Identical turret. The 130mm mbt used the challanger 2 LEP as its base. The Autoloader is still available for the challengers for when the time comes to switch to a 130 but that’s likely not for along time
Not identical, but very similar.
The Challenger 3 uses a turret that is based off the Challenger 2 LEP turret, but is not exactly the same. For example the CR2LEP turret lacked blowout panels, while the CR3 turret is modified at the rear to accomodate them for the 15 round turret ready rack. Both turrets are a welded evolution of the original cast CR2 turret.
But you’re still correct in that they are so similar that it would be possible to apply the CR2LEP technology over to the CR3 turret.
Yep, the 130mm was always in mind for the CR2 LEP project (which led to CR3) and as the turrets are entirely new there isn’t anything stopping them from creating one with an autoloader.
RBSL state that “significant growth potential” in physical architecture is a key aspect of the turrets design
1 Like
Good thing I didn’t mention the challenger 3 there lmao. Just clarified your mistake. The LEP tank was what rheinmetall used for their 130mm mbt they just added the new gun and Autoloader and some fancy sheet metal.
Yes lol the tank was made with 130mm guns in mind and it’s autoloader
The benefits of unmanned turrets are universal however, they provide better crew protection and smaller volume of the turret, I.E., less area that requires armour protection, which in turn lowers the weight.
It doesn’t matter if it’s an IFV or MBT, these benefits apply to both.
Schützenpanzer Puma, XM30, Boxer IFV, T-15, etc. plenty of (modern) programs show that we’re headed towards unmanned turrets.
Are you expecting them to go back to a manned turret later through development? Because I seriously doubt that.
I also would not be surprised to see the future Leopard 2 replacement have an unmanned design. Several prototypes from Germany have already demonstrated numerous unmanned turret designs.
All afvs of ifvs. They again have different needs and roles from mbts where a unmanned turret is better
When did I say that. I said it’s a platform that might have a lot of development change.
It very much might but again those replacements currently aren’t viable for the current day and it’s using tech that’s mostly not there or doctrinely not there. There’s many advantages to unmanned turrets and autoloading tanks, but they come at disadvantages like the lack of a 4th crew member or the fact a autoloader will always be less reliable
Also btw alot of boxers used manned turrets it really depends again on country and need
The most important question is:
Can it make tea?
Isnt one of the main reasons for the switch to autoloaders the weight increase of the potential 130mm ammo?
I already addressed this when I stated that the benefits of an unmanned turret design are universal.
You heavily implied it right here:
You stated things might change ‘‘a lot’’ during development specifically in response to me pointing out that the M1E3 used an unmanned design.
Common myth.
Autoloaders have been reliable for over half a century by now.
If you’re going to take issue with an autoloader’s possibility of malfunction, you might as well take issue with the entire concept of an AFV given that there are hundreds of mechanical systems that make up such a machine, all of which could suffer mechanical failure at some point.
Ya it’s because the 130mm shells are much heavier
1 Like
I said reliable lmao just they will never hear a loader. It will always be more reliable
M1E3 is going to enter IOC in 2030. A prototype is being tested in an active army unit this year.
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12495
Challenger 3 is IOC 2027 and FOC 2030. But it’s important to note that FOC for the Brits is 148 tanks. And IOC to the US Army is a brigade equipped, which is 86 tanks.
In the big picture these tanks will be entering service within like a couple years. Hardly 20 years. They are direct peers and absolutely should be compared to each other.
3 Likes
No, Gaijin denied that bug report
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/0HEVAQt37yxa
3 Likes
